Explanation of the Book of Tawhid-24
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"In Sahih al-Bukhari, from Bajalah ibn 'Ubadah, who said: Sunan al-Bayhaqi 15:742". The commentator (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that this is not in al-Bukhari and that this is not the wording of al-Bukhari. However, the hadith is authentic; it is not that it is not in al-Bukhari in this wording. Its origin is in al-Bukhari, but it is not there in this specific wording. What is in al-Bukhari is that he (may Allah be pleased with him) because the Zoroastrians permit marriage with close relatives, and may Allah protect us from that. That is, a person among them is permitted to marry his mother, his daughter, or his sister. So 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered that those related by blood be separated from their relatives. But the hadith is authentic from 'Umar that he ordered the killing of the sorcerer. Is this killing a hudud punishment or a killing for apostasy?
It is possible that it is for this or for that, but based on the previous details, we say: If the sorcery leads a person to disbelief, then his killing is a killing for apostasy. And if the sorcery does not lead him to disbelief, then his killing is a hudud punishment, a hudud that must be carried out. The conclusion is that it is obligatory to kill sorcerers, whether we say they are disbelievers or not. This is because of the magnitude of their harm, because of the magnitude of their harm, because of the magnitude of their harm, and the horror of their affair, and may Allah protect us from that. Because, as mentioned before, they cause illness, they kill, they join people together, they separate people, they separate a man from his wife, and a man from his beloved. Yes, and conversely. They may join people together, reconciling enemies, and they achieve their goals, and may Allah protect us from that.
For some of them may cast a spell on a person to make him love them and to attain their objectives from him, just as if one casts a spell on a woman to commit evil with her, and may Allah protect us from that, and to commit zina with her. This is used. So because of their harm and their horror, and because they strive to spread corruption on earth, it became obligatory upon the one in authority to kill them, and without inviting them to repent, as long as it is a hudud, because the one subject to a hudud is not invited to repent. Whenever he is captured, the hudud must be carried out on him. Yes?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: And apostasy is the same?
The Shaykh : There is a difference of opinion regarding apostasy, as mentioned before, whether the apostate is invited to repent or not. And we said that the correct view is that it returns to the ijtihad of the imam.
"And it is authentic from Hafsa (may Allah be pleased with her) and likewise it is authentic from Jundub". That is Jundub al-Khayr, who is nicknamed "the killer of the sorcerer" or titled "the killer of the sorcerer." The author says: "From Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him): From three of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)", meaning that the killing of the sorcerer is authentic from three of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and they are: 'Umar, Jundub, and Hafsa. The killing and the statement in favor of killing are established from these three, and the statement in favor of killing is in accordance with the principles of the Shari'ah, because these people, without doubt, strive to spread corruption on earth, and their corruption is among the greatest corruptions. So their killing is obligatory upon the imam. It is not permissible for the imam to neglect killing them, because such people, and may Allah protect us from that, if they are left to their own devices, their corruption spreads, their corruption spreads in their land and in the land of others. So when they are killed and executed, people are safe from the evil of these people, and people are deterred from practicing sorcery, so it does not become widespread and spread.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because?
The student: It rivals the divine decree and the joining of hearts, and these things are all among the attributes of the Lord.
The Shaykh : No, if he achieves it through demonic spirits and by seeking the help of the jinn, then it is shirk (associating partners with Allah)...
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It does not reach the level of shirk (associating partners with Allah). Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: The hadith of Hafsa.
The Shaykh : Hafsa, but Imam Ahmad authenticated it. The imam authenticated it.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : That is, known to be established. Its establishment is necessary. Its establishment is necessary. But if it becomes famous and widespread, then testimony by widespread fame is among the strongest testimonies. Testimony by widespread fame is, in fact, among the strongest testimonies. And now, if we asked a questioner: Who says, for example, that this is Ghanim, the son of the father, the son of Mazru'... by what route?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : By widespread fame. By widespread fame. So widespread fame is one of the routes of proof. And the scholars mentioned it even in the books of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), saying: One of the routes of knowledge is widespread fame. So if something becomes widespread and famous among people, it is ruled upon. Even the judge does not rule by his own knowledge except through widespread fame. Or did you not understand? The judge who knows the case with certainty is not permitted to rule on it. But how does he act when he knows it with certainty? He refers the judgment to another and becomes a witness. For example, I am a judge, and I heard so-and-so say to so-and-so: "I owe you one thousand dirhams." Then the one who confessed denied it, and they came to me to seek judgment. They came to me to seek judgment. I know that this is a confession. Is it permissible for me to rule, or is it not? Is it permissible for me not to rule? No, it is not permissible for me to rule, and it is not permissible for me not to rule. Because if I do not rule, it means that I have prevented a right that I know is a right. And if I rule, I rule by my knowledge. So what do I do? I say: "By Allah, people, I do not rule between you. Go to so-and-so, and I am a witness. And I am a witness."
But for famous and clear matters, it is permissible for the judge to rule by his knowledge, because the doubt is removed from him, because the doubt is removed from him. So if it is famous that this house belongs to so-and-so, or this property belongs to so-and-so, the judge may rule by his knowledge and execute his judgment. Allahu Akbar.
'Umar ibn al-Khattab wrote: "Kill every male and female sorcerer." He said: "So we killed three female sorcerers."
كتب عمر بن الخطاب : أن اقتلوا كل ساحر وساحرة قال : فقتلنا ثلاث سواحرHe ordered that every person related by blood among the Zoroastrians be separated.
أمر بأن يفرق بين كل ذي رحم من المجوسIt is possible that it is for this or for that, but based on the previous details, we say: If the sorcery leads a person to disbelief, then his killing is a killing for apostasy. And if the sorcery does not lead him to disbelief, then his killing is a hudud punishment, a hudud that must be carried out. The conclusion is that it is obligatory to kill sorcerers, whether we say they are disbelievers or not. This is because of the magnitude of their harm, because of the magnitude of their harm, because of the magnitude of their harm, and the horror of their affair, and may Allah protect us from that. Because, as mentioned before, they cause illness, they kill, they join people together, they separate people, they separate a man from his wife, and a man from his beloved. Yes, and conversely. They may join people together, reconciling enemies, and they achieve their goals, and may Allah protect us from that.
For some of them may cast a spell on a person to make him love them and to attain their objectives from him, just as if one casts a spell on a woman to commit evil with her, and may Allah protect us from that, and to commit zina with her. This is used. So because of their harm and their horror, and because they strive to spread corruption on earth, it became obligatory upon the one in authority to kill them, and without inviting them to repent, as long as it is a hudud, because the one subject to a hudud is not invited to repent. Whenever he is captured, the hudud must be carried out on him. Yes?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: And apostasy is the same?
The Shaykh : There is a difference of opinion regarding apostasy, as mentioned before, whether the apostate is invited to repent or not. And we said that the correct view is that it returns to the ijtihad of the imam.
"And it is authentic from Hafsa (may Allah be pleased with her)
That she ordered the killing of a slave girl who had cast a spell on her, so she was killed.
أنها أمرت بقتل جارية لها قد سحرتها سحرتها فقتلتThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : Because?
The student: It rivals the divine decree and the joining of hearts, and these things are all among the attributes of the Lord.
The Shaykh : No, if he achieves it through demonic spirits and by seeking the help of the jinn, then it is shirk (associating partners with Allah)...
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : It does not reach the level of shirk (associating partners with Allah). Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: The hadith of Hafsa.
The Shaykh : Hafsa, but Imam Ahmad authenticated it. The imam authenticated it.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : That is, known to be established. Its establishment is necessary. Its establishment is necessary. But if it becomes famous and widespread, then testimony by widespread fame is among the strongest testimonies. Testimony by widespread fame is, in fact, among the strongest testimonies. And now, if we asked a questioner: Who says, for example, that this is Ghanim, the son of the father, the son of Mazru'... by what route?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : By widespread fame. By widespread fame. So widespread fame is one of the routes of proof. And the scholars mentioned it even in the books of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), saying: One of the routes of knowledge is widespread fame. So if something becomes widespread and famous among people, it is ruled upon. Even the judge does not rule by his own knowledge except through widespread fame. Or did you not understand? The judge who knows the case with certainty is not permitted to rule on it. But how does he act when he knows it with certainty? He refers the judgment to another and becomes a witness. For example, I am a judge, and I heard so-and-so say to so-and-so: "I owe you one thousand dirhams." Then the one who confessed denied it, and they came to me to seek judgment. They came to me to seek judgment. I know that this is a confession. Is it permissible for me to rule, or is it not? Is it permissible for me not to rule? No, it is not permissible for me to rule, and it is not permissible for me not to rule. Because if I do not rule, it means that I have prevented a right that I know is a right. And if I rule, I rule by my knowledge. So what do I do? I say: "By Allah, people, I do not rule between you. Go to so-and-so, and I am a witness. And I am a witness."
But for famous and clear matters, it is permissible for the judge to rule by his knowledge, because the doubt is removed from him, because the doubt is removed from him. So if it is famous that this house belongs to so-and-so, or this property belongs to so-and-so, the judge may rule by his knowledge and execute his judgment. Allahu Akbar.